Johnny Arafiles v. Ben Curry

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION SEP 24 2013 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JOHNNY ARAFILES, No. 12-16072 Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:06-cv-01678-KJM- EFB v. BEN CURRY; ATTORNEY GENERAL MEMORANDUM* FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Kimberly J. Mueller, District Judge, Presiding Submitted September 10, 2013** San Francisco, California Before: SCHROEDER and BYBEE, Circuit Judges, and TIMLIN, Senior District Judge.*** * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). *** The Honorable Robert J. Timlin, Senior United States District Judge for the Central District of California, sitting by designation. California state prisoner Johnny Arafiles appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition challenging the parole board’s denials of parole after originally finding him eligible in 1991. Arafiles contends that his petition is timely under the continuing violation doctrine. Although the parole board granted Arafiles parole and fixed his term in 1991, the Governor reversed that decision. Relying on In re Dannenberg, 104 P.3d 783, 800 (Cal. 2005), the California courts concluded that, because of the Governor’s reversal of the grant of parole, the term was not fixed in 1991 and that Arafiles is serving an indeterminate term. Arafiles cannot claim a violation of his rights based on detention beyond the term of his sentence, because the term of his sentence has not been set. AFFIRMED. 2